fbpx
Wikipedia

ZeniMax v. Oculus

ZeniMax v. Oculus is a civil lawsuit filed by ZeniMax Media against Oculus VR on charges of theft of intellectual property relating to Oculus' virtual reality device, the Oculus Rift. The matter was settled with a private out-of-court agreement by December 2018.[1]

ZeniMax v. Oculus
CourtUnited States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Full case nameZeniMax Media Inc. et al. v. Oculus VR, Inc. et al.
DecidedFebruary 2, 2017
Defendant(s)Oculus VR, Facebook, Palmer Luckey, Brendan Iribe, John Carmack
Plaintiff(s)ZeniMax Media, id Software
Citation(s)N.D. Tex. Civil Case No. 3:14-cv-01849-P
Holding
Oculus and corporate officers Luckey and Brenden Iribe broke a non-disclosure agreement with ZeniMax. The Oculus Rift product does not use ZeniMax's trade secrets. Jury award to ZeniMax for $500 million.
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingJames E. Kinkeade
Keywords
Intellectual property, non-disclosure agreement

Background edit

The Oculus Rift is a virtual reality headset that was developed by Oculus VR. The company was founded by Palmer Luckey, who had a keen interest in head-mounted displays and had developed a prototype of the Oculus Rift by 2012. Concurrently, John Carmack, at the time of id Software, a subsidiary under ZeniMax Media, also was interested in head-mounted displays, saw Luckey's prototype for the Rift and modified it, showcasing the updated prototype at Electronic Entertainment Expo 2012 (E3) that June using a modified version of id's Doom 3.

Following E3 2012, Oculus VR launched a Kickstarter to fund further development of the Rift, ultimately raising more than $2.4 million (~$3.15 million in 2023) through it, one of the largest crowdfunding ventures at that time. The attention led to additional venture funding, with more than $91 million (~$117 million in 2023) invested by 2013. During this, Carmack left id Software to become the Chief Technology Officer for Oculus VR. In March 2014, Mark Zuckerberg announced that Facebook had acquired Oculus VR for $2 billion (~$2.54 billion in 2023).

Filings edit

 
The Oculus Rift "Development Kit 1" headset, developed from the 2013 Kickstarter funding

Around May 2014, shortly after Facebook made its deal to acquire Oculus VR, the Wall Street Journal reported that ZeniMax had sent two letters to Facebook and Oculus VR, asserting that any technology contributions Carmack had made towards VR while he was still an employee of id Software, including the "VR testbed" that Carmack had frequently demonstrated, were within the intellectual property (IP) of id and ZeniMax.[2] In a statement, ZeniMax said that they "provided necessary VR technology and other valuable assistance to Palmer Luckey and other Oculus employees in 2012 and 2013 to make the Oculus Rift a viable VR product, superior to other VR market offerings."[3]

ZeniMax stated that a 2012 non-disclosure agreement (NDA) and a non-ownership agreement that covered VR technology and signed by Luckey, prior to Oculus VR's formation, would cover any of Carmack's contributions to VR.[4]

ZeniMax contended that they had attempted to resolve these issues with Oculus prior to their acquisition by Facebook "whereby ZeniMax would be compensated for its intellectual property through equity ownership in Oculus but were unable to reach a satisfactory resolution".[3] Oculus denied the claims, stating that "It's unfortunate, but when there's this type of transaction, people come out of the woodwork with ridiculous and absurd claims".[3][2]

ZeniMax formally filed a lawsuit against Luckey and Oculus VR on May 21, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and seeking a jury trial. The lawsuit contended that Luckey and Oculus used ZeniMax's "trade secrets, copyrighted computer code, and technical know-how relating to virtual reality technology", as provided by Carmack, to develop the Oculus Rift product, and sought for financial damages for contract breach, copyright infringement, and unfair competition. ZeniMax also charged that Oculus, through Carmack, were able to hire several former ZeniMax/id Software employees who also had technical knowledge of its VR technology, which would allow them to rapidly fine-tune the VR testbed system to create the Rift.[5][6] In its filings, ZeniMax revealed it had "invested tens of millions of dollars in research and development" into VR technology, and that because they felt "Oculus and Luckey lacked the necessary expertise and technical know-how to create a viable virtual reality headset", they "sought expertise and know-how from Zenimax".[5]

Oculus' initial response to the charges was that "The lawsuit filed by ZeniMax has no merit whatsoever. As we have previously said, ZeniMax did not contribute to any Oculus technology. Oculus will defend these claims vigorously."[5] The company filed its formal response on June 25, 2014, stating that ZeniMax "falsely claims ownership in Oculus VR technology in a transparent attempt to take advantage of the Oculus VR sale to Facebook".[7] Oculus stated that prior to the acquisition by Facebook, "ZeniMax never raised any claim of infringement against Oculus VR, undoubtedly because ZeniMax never has contributed any intellectual property or technology to Oculus VR".[7]

The response stated that ZeniMax's filing was "deliberately misstating some facts and omitting others" and that "there is not a line of ZeniMax code or any of its technology in any Oculus VR product".[7] Oculus' response included photographs and documents that demonstrated they had been working on their own VR technology as early as August 2010. The response further contended that the key document of ZeniMax's suit, the NDA signed by Luckey, was "never finalized", and thus is not a "valid and enforceable agreement".[7]

ZeniMax amended the case to include Facebook among the defendants on August 29, 2014. ZeniMax charged that Facebook intended to "leverage and commercially exploit Oculus's virtual reality technology — which is built upon ZeniMax's unlawfully misappropriated intellectual property — for the financial benefit of Facebook's core business of online social networking and advertising."[8]

Oculus and Facebook attempted to have the case dismissed, but the presiding judge disagreed, and, in August 2015, allowed the case to proceed to a jury trial that started in August 2016.[9]

District Court trial edit

During the discovery phase, ZeniMax sought a deposition from Zuckerberg, believing he had "unique knowledge" of the Facebook-Oculus deal. Following a request from Facebook, the judge ruled that Zuckerberg must provide a deposition, but only after lesser-ranking employees had been deposed as to have a "less intrusive discovery" process.[10]

In August 2016, it was discovered that ZeniMax had further modified their complaint, specifically adding by name Carmack as Oculus's CTO, and Brendan Iribe as Oculus' CEO. The updated complaint alleged that during his last days at id Software, Carmack "copied thousands of documents from a computer at ZeniMax to a USB storage device", and later after his employment was terminated he "returned to ZeniMax's premises to take a customized tool for developing VR Technology belonging to ZeniMax that itself is part of ZeniMax's VR technology".[11] ZeniMax's complaint charged that Iribe had directed Oculus to "[disseminate] to the press the false and fanciful story that Luckey was the brilliant inventor of VR technology who had developed that technology in his parents' garage", when "Luckey lacked the training, expertise, resources, or know-how to create commercially viable VR technology", thus aiding in the IP theft from ZeniMax.[11]

Further, the updated complaint asserted Facebook knew or had reason to know that Oculus' claims on the VR IP was false. Oculus responded, "This complaint filed by ZeniMax is one-sided and conveys only ZeniMax's interpretation of the story.[11] The court had a computer forensic expert evaluate the contents of Carmack's computer, and on October 28, 2016, the expert reported that from their findings "statements and representations that have been sworn to and are before the court are factually inaccurate".[12] The court ordered Oculus to comply with providing previously-redacted communications it had with Carmack as a result, as well as requesting Samsung to provide information on its Samsung Gear VR which was co-created with Oculus.[12]

The jury trial started on January 9, 2017.[13] During the trial, Zuckerberg testified in court that he believed the allegations from ZeniMax Media were false.[14] In the plaintiff's closing arguments, ZeniMax's lawyers requested $2 billion in compensation for Oculus' actions, and an additional $4 billion in punitive damages.[15]

Decision edit

The jury trial concluded on February 2, 2017, with the jury finding that Luckey had violated the NDA he had with ZeniMax, and awarding $500 million (~$611 million in 2023) to ZeniMax.[16][17] However, the jury found that Oculus, Facebook, Luckey, Iribe, and Carmack did not misappropriate or steal trade secrets,[16][17][18] though ZeniMax continued to publicly assert otherwise.[19] Oculus was ordered to pay $200 million for breaking the non-disclosure agreement, and an additional $50 million for copyright infringement; for the false designation of origin charges, Oculus and Luckey were ordered to pay $50 million each, while Iribe would be responsible for $150 million.[18]

Appeals and additional actions edit

While Oculus said "the jury found decisively in our favor" over the issue of trade secrets,[18] the company planned to file an appeal on the other charges.[20] Carmack stated that he disagreed with the decision, particularly on ZeniMax's "characterization, misdirection, and selective omissions" regarding his behavior, adding that he had accounted for all the data in his possession.[21] Carmack took issue with one of ZeniMax's expert witnesses who testified that non-literal copying, the act of creating a program with similar functions but using different computer code, constitutes a copyright violation.[21]

ZeniMax stated that it was considering filing for a court-ordered halt to all Oculus Rift units in light of the jury decision;[22] and on February 24, 2017, filed an injunction to have the court halt sales of the Oculus Rift and development kits.[23] Oral arguments for these injunctions were held on June 19, 2017. ZeniMax argued that either Oculus should halt sales of the Rift, or otherwise receive 20% of all Rift sales over the next ten years. Oculus, in addition to its own filings towards a new trial, requested the judge throw out the jury verdict, or reduced the penalty to $50 million.[24] In June 2018, the judge overseeing the case agreed to cut the damages owed by Oculus in half to US$250 million (with an additional US$54 million in interest), while denying ZeniMax their request to halt Oculus sales.[25]

By December 2018, ZeniMax stated they had reached a settlement agreement with Facebook and Oculus for an undisclosed amount, pending approval by the federal court.[26]

Other lawsuits edit

In a separate lawsuit filed in March 2017, Carmack asserted that ZeniMax did not complete its payment to him of the acquisition of id Software, and asked the court to find for him for the remaining $22 million (~$26.9 million in 2023) he states the company owes him. ZeniMax's lawyers asserted that from the Oculus case, they had not been found in violation of Carmack's employment after ZeniMax acquired id Software and that this new suit was "without merit".[27] By October 2018, Carmack stated that he and ZeniMax reached an agreement and that "Zenimax has fully satisfied their obligations to me", and this lawsuit was subsequently dropped.[28]

In May 2017, ZeniMax filed a new lawsuit towards Samsung over the Gear VR. In addition to the previous legal decision over IP issues related to the Oculus technology used in the Gear VR, ZeniMax also contends in the new suit that Carmack had allowed Matt Hooper, who had been recently fired as a creative director from id, into id's facilities after hours without permission to work out an "attack plan" for developing mobile VR, which would ultimately lead to the Gear VR device. ZeniMax seeks punitive damages as well as a share of profits from Gear VR.[1]

References edit

  1. ^ a b Crecente, Brian (May 15, 2017). "ZeniMax: Samsung's Gear VR tech conceived at id". Polygon. Retrieved May 16, 2017.
  2. ^ a b Hoffman, Liz; Albergotti, Reed (May 1, 2014). "Oculus, Facebook Face Challenge to Rights Over 'Rift'". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  3. ^ a b c Hollister, Sean (May 1, 2014). "Oculus and Facebook face legal challenge from John Carmack's former employer". The Verge. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  4. ^ Hollister, Sean (May 1, 2014). "One document could decide whether Oculus owes ZeniMax millions". The Verge. Retrieved May 2, 2014.
  5. ^ a b c Gilbert, Ben (May 21, 2014). "Oculus VR and Palmer Luckey being sued by CTO's former employer". Engadget. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  6. ^ Lowensohn, Josh (May 21, 2014). "Oculus VR and its founder sued by ZeniMax and id Software". The Verge. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  7. ^ a b c d Sarkar, Samit (June 25, 2014). "Oculus: ZeniMax suit is a 'transparent attempt to take advantage' of Facebook acquisition". Polygon.
  8. ^ Flook, Bill (August 29, 2014). "Zenimax adds Facebook to its suit against Oculus, expands allegations against social network". Washington Business Journal. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  9. ^ Winfield, Nick (August 10, 2015). "Game Publisher's Lawsuit Against Oculus Moves Forward". New York Times. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  10. ^ Ribeiro, John (December 9, 2015). "Facebook's Zuckerberg ordered to testify over Oculus purchase". PC World. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  11. ^ a b c Newhouse, Alex (August 22, 2016). "ZeniMax Bashes Palmer Luckey, Claims Oculus Lied About His Accomplishments". GameSpot. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  12. ^ a b Crecente, Brian (October 28, 2016). "Carmack hard drive contains proof of factual inaccuracies in Oculus lawsuit, expert says". Polygon. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  13. ^ Korosec, Tom (January 9, 2017). "Facebook's VR Foray Derided as 'Fanciful Story'". Bloomberg News. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  14. ^ Wingfield, Nick; Isaac, Mike (January 17, 2017). "Mark Zuckerberg, in Suit, Testifies in Oculus Intellectual Property Trial". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved January 18, 2017.
  15. ^ Poon, Timothy; Crecente, Brian (January 26, 2017). "Oculus VR case goes to jury with a $6B request". Polygon. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  16. ^ a b Orland, Kyle (February 1, 2017). "Oculus, execs liable for $500 million in ZeniMax VR trial". Ars Technica. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  17. ^ a b "Zenimax v. Oculus - Court's charge to the jury" (PDF). Retrieved August 25, 2023.
  18. ^ a b c Poon, Timothy; Crecente, Brian (February 1, 2017). "Oculus lawsuit ends with half billion dollar judgment awarded to ZeniMax". Polygon. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  19. ^ Hillier, Brenna (February 2, 2017). "ZeniMax may seek an injunction to halt Oculus Rift sales in wake of broken NDA verdict, details evidence of Oculus's alleged theft". VG247. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  20. ^ Larson, Selena (February 1, 2017). "Facebook loses $500 million Oculus lawsuit". CNN. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  21. ^ a b Kerr, Chris (February 1, 2017). "Zenimax vs. Oculus: Carmack denies allegations, slams expert analysis". Gamasutra. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  22. ^ Crecente, Brian (February 2017). "ZeniMax may seek court order to halt sale of current Oculus Rift headsets". Polygon. Retrieved February 2, 2017.
  23. ^ Dayus, Oscar (February 24, 2017). "ZeniMax Files Injunction Against Oculus Over Use Of 'Stolen Tech'". GameSpot. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
  24. ^ Wawro, Alex (June 21, 2017). "After winning $500M in lawsuit against Oculus, ZeniMax pushes for more". Gamasutra. Retrieved June 22, 2017.
  25. ^ Korosec, Tom (June 27, 2018). "Facebook Payout in Oculus Copyright Spat Cut to $250 Million". Bloomberg L.P. Retrieved June 28, 2018.
  26. ^ Nunneley, Stephany (December 12, 2018). "ZeniMax accepts settlement offer from Facebook in Oculus lawsuit". VG247. Retrieved December 12, 2018.
  27. ^ Repco, Melissa (March 9, 2017). "Legal feud over Facebook-owned Oculus has another Dallas chapter". Dallas News. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
  28. ^ Cooper, Daniel (October 12, 2018). "'Doom' co-creator John Carmack ends legal fight with ZeniMax". Engadget. Retrieved October 12, 2018.

zenimax, oculus, civil, lawsuit, filed, zenimax, media, against, oculus, charges, theft, intellectual, property, relating, oculus, virtual, reality, device, oculus, rift, matter, settled, with, private, court, agreement, december, 2018, courtunited, states, di. ZeniMax v Oculus is a civil lawsuit filed by ZeniMax Media against Oculus VR on charges of theft of intellectual property relating to Oculus virtual reality device the Oculus Rift The matter was settled with a private out of court agreement by December 2018 1 ZeniMax v OculusCourtUnited States District Court for the Northern District of TexasFull case nameZeniMax Media Inc et al v Oculus VR Inc et al DecidedFebruary 2 2017Defendant s Oculus VR Facebook Palmer Luckey Brendan Iribe John CarmackPlaintiff s ZeniMax Media id SoftwareCitation s N D Tex Civil Case No 3 14 cv 01849 PHoldingOculus and corporate officers Luckey and Brenden Iribe broke a non disclosure agreement with ZeniMax The Oculus Rift product does not use ZeniMax s trade secrets Jury award to ZeniMax for 500 million Court membershipJudge s sittingJames E KinkeadeKeywordsIntellectual property non disclosure agreement Contents 1 Background 2 Filings 3 District Court trial 3 1 Decision 4 Appeals and additional actions 5 Other lawsuits 6 ReferencesBackground editThe Oculus Rift is a virtual reality headset that was developed by Oculus VR The company was founded by Palmer Luckey who had a keen interest in head mounted displays and had developed a prototype of the Oculus Rift by 2012 Concurrently John Carmack at the time of id Software a subsidiary under ZeniMax Media also was interested in head mounted displays saw Luckey s prototype for the Rift and modified it showcasing the updated prototype at Electronic Entertainment Expo 2012 E3 that June using a modified version of id s Doom 3 Following E3 2012 Oculus VR launched a Kickstarter to fund further development of the Rift ultimately raising more than 2 4 million 3 15 million in 2023 through it one of the largest crowdfunding ventures at that time The attention led to additional venture funding with more than 91 million 117 million in 2023 invested by 2013 During this Carmack left id Software to become the Chief Technology Officer for Oculus VR In March 2014 Mark Zuckerberg announced that Facebook had acquired Oculus VR for 2 billion 2 54 billion in 2023 Filings edit nbsp The Oculus Rift Development Kit 1 headset developed from the 2013 Kickstarter funding Around May 2014 shortly after Facebook made its deal to acquire Oculus VR the Wall Street Journal reported that ZeniMax had sent two letters to Facebook and Oculus VR asserting that any technology contributions Carmack had made towards VR while he was still an employee of id Software including the VR testbed that Carmack had frequently demonstrated were within the intellectual property IP of id and ZeniMax 2 In a statement ZeniMax said that they provided necessary VR technology and other valuable assistance to Palmer Luckey and other Oculus employees in 2012 and 2013 to make the Oculus Rift a viable VR product superior to other VR market offerings 3 ZeniMax stated that a 2012 non disclosure agreement NDA and a non ownership agreement that covered VR technology and signed by Luckey prior to Oculus VR s formation would cover any of Carmack s contributions to VR 4 ZeniMax contended that they had attempted to resolve these issues with Oculus prior to their acquisition by Facebook whereby ZeniMax would be compensated for its intellectual property through equity ownership in Oculus but were unable to reach a satisfactory resolution 3 Oculus denied the claims stating that It s unfortunate but when there s this type of transaction people come out of the woodwork with ridiculous and absurd claims 3 2 ZeniMax formally filed a lawsuit against Luckey and Oculus VR on May 21 2014 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and seeking a jury trial The lawsuit contended that Luckey and Oculus used ZeniMax s trade secrets copyrighted computer code and technical know how relating to virtual reality technology as provided by Carmack to develop the Oculus Rift product and sought for financial damages for contract breach copyright infringement and unfair competition ZeniMax also charged that Oculus through Carmack were able to hire several former ZeniMax id Software employees who also had technical knowledge of its VR technology which would allow them to rapidly fine tune the VR testbed system to create the Rift 5 6 In its filings ZeniMax revealed it had invested tens of millions of dollars in research and development into VR technology and that because they felt Oculus and Luckey lacked the necessary expertise and technical know how to create a viable virtual reality headset they sought expertise and know how from Zenimax 5 Oculus initial response to the charges was that The lawsuit filed by ZeniMax has no merit whatsoever As we have previously said ZeniMax did not contribute to any Oculus technology Oculus will defend these claims vigorously 5 The company filed its formal response on June 25 2014 stating that ZeniMax falsely claims ownership in Oculus VR technology in a transparent attempt to take advantage of the Oculus VR sale to Facebook 7 Oculus stated that prior to the acquisition by Facebook ZeniMax never raised any claim of infringement against Oculus VR undoubtedly because ZeniMax never has contributed any intellectual property or technology to Oculus VR 7 The response stated that ZeniMax s filing was deliberately misstating some facts and omitting others and that there is not a line of ZeniMax code or any of its technology in any Oculus VR product 7 Oculus response included photographs and documents that demonstrated they had been working on their own VR technology as early as August 2010 The response further contended that the key document of ZeniMax s suit the NDA signed by Luckey was never finalized and thus is not a valid and enforceable agreement 7 ZeniMax amended the case to include Facebook among the defendants on August 29 2014 ZeniMax charged that Facebook intended to leverage and commercially exploit Oculus s virtual reality technology which is built upon ZeniMax s unlawfully misappropriated intellectual property for the financial benefit of Facebook s core business of online social networking and advertising 8 Oculus and Facebook attempted to have the case dismissed but the presiding judge disagreed and in August 2015 allowed the case to proceed to a jury trial that started in August 2016 9 District Court trial editDuring the discovery phase ZeniMax sought a deposition from Zuckerberg believing he had unique knowledge of the Facebook Oculus deal Following a request from Facebook the judge ruled that Zuckerberg must provide a deposition but only after lesser ranking employees had been deposed as to have a less intrusive discovery process 10 In August 2016 it was discovered that ZeniMax had further modified their complaint specifically adding by name Carmack as Oculus s CTO and Brendan Iribe as Oculus CEO The updated complaint alleged that during his last days at id Software Carmack copied thousands of documents from a computer at ZeniMax to a USB storage device and later after his employment was terminated he returned to ZeniMax s premises to take a customized tool for developing VR Technology belonging to ZeniMax that itself is part of ZeniMax s VR technology 11 ZeniMax s complaint charged that Iribe had directed Oculus to disseminate to the press the false and fanciful story that Luckey was the brilliant inventor of VR technology who had developed that technology in his parents garage when Luckey lacked the training expertise resources or know how to create commercially viable VR technology thus aiding in the IP theft from ZeniMax 11 Further the updated complaint asserted Facebook knew or had reason to know that Oculus claims on the VR IP was false Oculus responded This complaint filed by ZeniMax is one sided and conveys only ZeniMax s interpretation of the story 11 The court had a computer forensic expert evaluate the contents of Carmack s computer and on October 28 2016 the expert reported that from their findings statements and representations that have been sworn to and are before the court are factually inaccurate 12 The court ordered Oculus to comply with providing previously redacted communications it had with Carmack as a result as well as requesting Samsung to provide information on its Samsung Gear VR which was co created with Oculus 12 The jury trial started on January 9 2017 13 During the trial Zuckerberg testified in court that he believed the allegations from ZeniMax Media were false 14 In the plaintiff s closing arguments ZeniMax s lawyers requested 2 billion in compensation for Oculus actions and an additional 4 billion in punitive damages 15 Decision edit The jury trial concluded on February 2 2017 with the jury finding that Luckey had violated the NDA he had with ZeniMax and awarding 500 million 611 million in 2023 to ZeniMax 16 17 However the jury found that Oculus Facebook Luckey Iribe and Carmack did not misappropriate or steal trade secrets 16 17 18 though ZeniMax continued to publicly assert otherwise 19 Oculus was ordered to pay 200 million for breaking the non disclosure agreement and an additional 50 million for copyright infringement for the false designation of origin charges Oculus and Luckey were ordered to pay 50 million each while Iribe would be responsible for 150 million 18 Appeals and additional actions editWhile Oculus said the jury found decisively in our favor over the issue of trade secrets 18 the company planned to file an appeal on the other charges 20 Carmack stated that he disagreed with the decision particularly on ZeniMax s characterization misdirection and selective omissions regarding his behavior adding that he had accounted for all the data in his possession 21 Carmack took issue with one of ZeniMax s expert witnesses who testified that non literal copying the act of creating a program with similar functions but using different computer code constitutes a copyright violation 21 ZeniMax stated that it was considering filing for a court ordered halt to all Oculus Rift units in light of the jury decision 22 and on February 24 2017 filed an injunction to have the court halt sales of the Oculus Rift and development kits 23 Oral arguments for these injunctions were held on June 19 2017 ZeniMax argued that either Oculus should halt sales of the Rift or otherwise receive 20 of all Rift sales over the next ten years Oculus in addition to its own filings towards a new trial requested the judge throw out the jury verdict or reduced the penalty to 50 million 24 In June 2018 the judge overseeing the case agreed to cut the damages owed by Oculus in half to US 250 million with an additional US 54 million in interest while denying ZeniMax their request to halt Oculus sales 25 By December 2018 ZeniMax stated they had reached a settlement agreement with Facebook and Oculus for an undisclosed amount pending approval by the federal court 26 Other lawsuits editIn a separate lawsuit filed in March 2017 Carmack asserted that ZeniMax did not complete its payment to him of the acquisition of id Software and asked the court to find for him for the remaining 22 million 26 9 million in 2023 he states the company owes him ZeniMax s lawyers asserted that from the Oculus case they had not been found in violation of Carmack s employment after ZeniMax acquired id Software and that this new suit was without merit 27 By October 2018 Carmack stated that he and ZeniMax reached an agreement and that Zenimax has fully satisfied their obligations to me and this lawsuit was subsequently dropped 28 In May 2017 ZeniMax filed a new lawsuit towards Samsung over the Gear VR In addition to the previous legal decision over IP issues related to the Oculus technology used in the Gear VR ZeniMax also contends in the new suit that Carmack had allowed Matt Hooper who had been recently fired as a creative director from id into id s facilities after hours without permission to work out an attack plan for developing mobile VR which would ultimately lead to the Gear VR device ZeniMax seeks punitive damages as well as a share of profits from Gear VR 1 References edit a b Crecente Brian May 15 2017 ZeniMax Samsung s Gear VR tech conceived at id Polygon Retrieved May 16 2017 a b Hoffman Liz Albergotti Reed May 1 2014 Oculus Facebook Face Challenge to Rights Over Rift Wall Street Journal Retrieved February 2 2017 a b c Hollister Sean May 1 2014 Oculus and Facebook face legal challenge from John Carmack s former employer The Verge Retrieved February 2 2017 Hollister Sean May 1 2014 One document could decide whether Oculus owes ZeniMax millions The Verge Retrieved May 2 2014 a b c Gilbert Ben May 21 2014 Oculus VR and Palmer Luckey being sued by CTO s former employer Engadget Retrieved February 1 2017 Lowensohn Josh May 21 2014 Oculus VR and its founder sued by ZeniMax and id Software The Verge Retrieved February 1 2017 a b c d Sarkar Samit June 25 2014 Oculus ZeniMax suit is a transparent attempt to take advantage of Facebook acquisition Polygon Flook Bill August 29 2014 Zenimax adds Facebook to its suit against Oculus expands allegations against social network Washington Business Journal Retrieved February 2 2017 Winfield Nick August 10 2015 Game Publisher s Lawsuit Against Oculus Moves Forward New York Times Retrieved February 2 2017 Ribeiro John December 9 2015 Facebook s Zuckerberg ordered to testify over Oculus purchase PC World Retrieved February 1 2017 a b c Newhouse Alex August 22 2016 ZeniMax Bashes Palmer Luckey Claims Oculus Lied About His Accomplishments GameSpot Retrieved February 1 2017 a b Crecente Brian October 28 2016 Carmack hard drive contains proof of factual inaccuracies in Oculus lawsuit expert says Polygon Retrieved February 1 2017 Korosec Tom January 9 2017 Facebook s VR Foray Derided as Fanciful Story Bloomberg News Retrieved February 1 2017 Wingfield Nick Isaac Mike January 17 2017 Mark Zuckerberg in Suit Testifies in Oculus Intellectual Property Trial The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Retrieved January 18 2017 Poon Timothy Crecente Brian January 26 2017 Oculus VR case goes to jury with a 6B request Polygon Retrieved February 2 2017 a b Orland Kyle February 1 2017 Oculus execs liable for 500 million in ZeniMax VR trial Ars Technica Retrieved February 1 2017 a b Zenimax v Oculus Court s charge to the jury PDF Retrieved August 25 2023 a b c Poon Timothy Crecente Brian February 1 2017 Oculus lawsuit ends with half billion dollar judgment awarded to ZeniMax Polygon Retrieved February 2 2017 Hillier Brenna February 2 2017 ZeniMax may seek an injunction to halt Oculus Rift sales in wake of broken NDA verdict details evidence of Oculus s alleged theft VG247 Retrieved February 2 2017 Larson Selena February 1 2017 Facebook loses 500 million Oculus lawsuit CNN Retrieved February 2 2017 a b Kerr Chris February 1 2017 Zenimax vs Oculus Carmack denies allegations slams expert analysis Gamasutra Retrieved February 2 2017 Crecente Brian February 2017 ZeniMax may seek court order to halt sale of current Oculus Rift headsets Polygon Retrieved February 2 2017 Dayus Oscar February 24 2017 ZeniMax Files Injunction Against Oculus Over Use Of Stolen Tech GameSpot Retrieved March 10 2017 Wawro Alex June 21 2017 After winning 500M in lawsuit against Oculus ZeniMax pushes for more Gamasutra Retrieved June 22 2017 Korosec Tom June 27 2018 Facebook Payout in Oculus Copyright Spat Cut to 250 Million Bloomberg L P Retrieved June 28 2018 Nunneley Stephany December 12 2018 ZeniMax accepts settlement offer from Facebook in Oculus lawsuit VG247 Retrieved December 12 2018 Repco Melissa March 9 2017 Legal feud over Facebook owned Oculus has another Dallas chapter Dallas News Retrieved March 10 2017 Cooper Daniel October 12 2018 Doom co creator John Carmack ends legal fight with ZeniMax Engadget Retrieved October 12 2018 Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title ZeniMax v Oculus amp oldid 1218769142, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.